GOONL!NE: Miyamoto and the Houser brothers better be hiding under the desk, Fumito Ueda is coming for them and their games.
UEDA = true genius, pure awesomeness.
Which explains a lot.
I couldn't agree more with what he's saying. I played GTA4 on 360 for a few hours and got bored (like I did with every other GTA game except for San Andreas), and with Super Mario Galaxy I played it literally for 20 mins and was so p***ed off with the controls that I haven't played the game since. SMG was/is over-hyped, how hard can it be to make Mario turn around on the spot? Instead he does a stupid running thing and falls into core of the planet.
Even if you agree, this article is so misleading and sensationlist. It makes me actually feel sick. I am disgusted by this.
I agree if you ask me to name two overated games it would be gta4 and mario galaxy. I hope trashes halo 3, resident evil 5, and gears2.
Agreed, I am playing through SOTC this week just because I found it at the bottom of my old PS2 collection and its that damn good. BC PS3's FTMFW
"how hard can it be to make Mario turn around on the spot? " hit the opposite direction to where he is facing? Worked for me. Controls aren't hard at all, you just fail at them. Aaand SOTC is awesome =)... just wished he had some puzzles as well or dungeons.
SOTC had alot of puzzles. The best in any game i have ever played. Every puzzle on how to bring those colossi down was just fantastic. I literally spent hours on them. Never used any guide as thats for kids.
Basically every boss in any game has a "puzzle" to destroy them. I meant that the game could have been so much more( while in fact its already one of the most amazing games already made) if it extended itself like ...for instance zelda does. I wouldn't mind solving puzzles and kicking enemies ass with such gameplay, have some mini collosi as well and it would have been more awesome than it is. O and the puzzles werent that hard, at least not to me. Still awesome game though.
What, and you're saying Miyamoto ISN'T a true genius?? Get lost. I know Ueda is a genius, but he isn't the only one.
People need to read, he wasn't putting down SMG, he was just saying that he had heard that Myimoto was inspired by SOC and he didn't feel that way. And he was just saying he thought GTA4 could have been less repetitive.
GTA was known for increasing the ante each time, and graphics were never the real focus due to the excuse of it being a sandbox game. They looked great, but the gameplay far eclipsed the graphics. It looked good, but what you could DO was the selling point of GTA. I dropped GTA4 after about.. 4 hours in.. I've never done that in the history of GTA games. Being bored was impossible in all previous GTA's.. Even the thrill kill/prostitute runs of just having fun in the empty lifeless city were boring. SA on the other hand has all types of things to do outside of playing the initial story mode. Which VC also had.
I'm still tied between GTA2 and SA for my fav GTA game. GTA4 tried to be too 'grown up' and 'mature' when all that we wanted was to be irresponsible and immature, turned out to be a very good game this gen, but just wasn't that much 'fun' or 'rude'. Still, with the direction that Chinatown Wars moved in, GTA could be back to normal before we know it.
I don't know if u got gta 4 on ps3 or somethin,gta 4 on ps3 is perhaps the worst port I've ever seen,on ps3 the game fels So weak,cold and damn blurry compared to 360 version,got the 360 version after 5 months from byuing it on 360 and I was SO surprised,the 360 version playes,looked and feels much better than on ps3,believe me im not a fanboy,I bet it's even worse than fear and orange box on ps3,for me,all these issues ruined my gameplay experince. ueda,I respect your hard work,just focus on the game
^^ Talk about exaggeration I own both versions and the differences are not that big at all, they both have their good points to them.
And I too played all versions of GTA4 including the superior PC version. The problem is the game design, not the performance. I didn't say a single thing about the graphics, because we are talking about G-T-F`ING A. A sandbox game. Rockstars problem may have been just that, they some how got confused into thinking people were playing the game for the graphics instead of gameplay. The streets of simulated NYC are empty on all versions except the PC versions. The details that you have to zoom into tell aren't of any importance either. Because the game is boring, everyone fell for the hype, and Rockstar undelivered anything of any significant meaning or improvement over the original games except the body-animations. Yawn.
so lets don't start this tired arguement all over. i played BOTH versions and they're the same game and it wasn't that great. and, when you compare #4 to vice city or san andreas.........it really shows just how much fun stuff was cut when they made GTA4. hey ape, what's with this comment: "360 version FEELS much better than the ps3 version"......... the 360 version "feels" better??????WTF does that mean????
That game looked like crap, and didn't have the best controls, but the only game I played more was Okami. There was just so much to do in SA it never got boring. The voice acting was top notch, the world was so big, the missions were diverse, everything just worked.
if i was forced to pick, i'd go with vice city over SA only because i loved the "miami-like" city. but both games had sooooooooo much to do and lots of fun to be had!
You have the right to your own opinion. IMO the differences you described are visual and have nothing to do with the gameplay or funfactor of the game. So IMO GTA4 is the same mediocre pile weather you play it on 360 or PS3. Now SA was a fun GTA game.
I bought GTA4 on the PC and was thrilled to hurry home to install it and play it but after 3 hours of gameplay the game got repetitive. Out of all GTAs that I've played, the best I thought were Vice City and San Andreas.
I've heard this argument before, but as a first time GTA'er, maybe you can explain to me how or why you couldn't do crazy, silly, or over the top stuff in GTA4. Could you not steal cars, kill grandma's with rocket launchers, blow up gas stations, steal helicopters, consort with prostitutes and all kinds of other degenerate things? Assuming this kind of stuff is fun (and I think it is), why would this not be enough pandemonium? Can you give your take please...thanks. Anyone else too if you want.
But couple of more frames per second and extra pixels won't help you in this argument. The only addition that was considered impressive to me in GTAIV was the new engine, which ran the same on ps3 and 360(i own both versions), and the online component of the game which gets boring after awhile. Regardless if you played this game in 1080p or 640p, it doesn't change the fact that it lacks content and variety San Andreas had. PS3 version is just as playable and enjoyable as the 360 version. There's really no major differences besides the exclusive content.
Every time people rag on GTA4, Ape has to comment on how superior the 360 version is and that playing the PS3 version was "the problem". Nearly half the reviewers and the Housers all preferred the PS3 version. I've seen ten videos of 360 pop-in, that I never saw on the PS3 version and the draw distances were better on PS3. And 360 was the cold one, Ps3 had "warmer colours", from Sam himself! Both games were separate but equal!
GTA4 was rubbish on the 360. never played the PS3 version and didn't really play the 360 version after about an hour or 2. there was something seriously wrong with the shadows everywhere. quickest traded game in my history of .. um .. trading games, but not because of the graphics. it seemed to take a step backwards in my opinion. Remember when driver 2 came out and they tried to do too much with the engine and it was really bad, thats how it felt. i think they allocated too much memory to the graphics or something but the popup and vanishing acts annoyed me too much for a 'next gen' game. and the game series is just boring to me now anyway. they know they don't have to spend extra time on polish when there are idiots like me who will still buy it
content,stuff and things to do in gta 4 was indeed a big problem,I know that,no side missions,no air planes,car customsations,no country side places,mountains,rpg like skill system,parachuts,gangs,gang wars,robbing houses,,no desserts,not enough clothes,haircuts,tattoos,,next gta will fix that,they have done an amazing job with gta 4,the gameplay feels "grand" but needs POLISH ,I know but the thing is,it's so realistic and damn epic,just imagine If u have the same amount of content with rage engine,"HEAD EXPLODS" I got both versions and I got to say,R* better build gta 5 on ps3 or make it exclusive to ps3(they should),rage engine was optimised for 360 by the looks of it and btw,TLAD is very good,go get get,u will not be disappointed,it has gangs,new bikes,new humor,weapons etc.. jeez,all these disagrees,it's like I killed someone,chill guys
@ glennc i am really not sure if your talking about the same gta4 here. i agree with everyone else, gta4's problem was not its graphics or any of the technical stuff ( although it had a few small problems ) GTA's problem was the content. if you want to talk about popin and things vanishing take a look at InFamous and prototype. Infamous had horrible popin, i owned and played the game. I started playing GTA4 again recently and the more i play it and look back at games like prototype, infamous, saints row 2... the more i realize what an amazing job R* did in the graphics department. i am usually tend to just go along with the " everyone has their opinion " on this sort of thing, but i have to stand up on your comment... i just don't know how anyone can complain about GTA's graphics. For a sandbox game, compared to other sandbox games GTA4 is by far one of the best looking. I have gone back and played some of the old gta games and the difference is huge. as i said, the problem is what everyone else has pointed out - Content. that was what let gta4 down and i can see why people didn't like it. Where was the mission jumping rooftops so you can beam a pair of Knockers onto the state building ?(vice city) or some crazy mission like that. it was like they sanitized the game or something. all the missions were go here kill this person, go there pick this up... Niko didn't feel like he had any ambition at all. he was just " looking for someone ". i kept playing it because i kept thinking; right, when am i going to get round to building up my own gang of crazy Russian mafia ? when am i going to buy/ steal / kill the owner of the biggest house in the city. i kept playing it thinking it would happen... its going to happen... its got to happen, its GTA for F$£k sake ! and it didn't happen :-( however when i think about the lack of content one interview comes to mind ( this was just before the game released) The interviewer asked Houser about the creative process behind the gta games. Houser replied that, GTA3 was all about getting the tech right and running smooth, once they had that in place the next few games they focused on content. then he said they followed the same process with GTA4. GTA4 was about getting the tech right, getting the engine running smooth and doing all the stuff they needed it to do. on that note, i think its safe to say we will prob see a lot more of the content we want and like back in future gta games. I think they experimented a bit with GTA4 as well and i think the feedback is clear, we liked the options and variety in the old games. I still have faith in R* and even though it was not as good as i had hoped it was still a fun and beautiful game and still technically the most impressive open world game in my book ( on a tech level ).
While Galaxy and GTA 4 were great games, well in my and most peoples' opinion at least, they weren't as innovative as their predecessors. I wouldn't call these statements scathing, but more a statement of Ueda's opinions on the two highest rated games this gen. @ape007 What planet are you living on? Go watch IGN's head to head of the game, they say the two versions are just about equal.
GTA 4 may have been a "great" game to some but, i didn't enjoy playing it the way i enjoyed the previous 3 games in the series.
Next thing he'll say is that the PS3 version has more pop in. Lawl Last time I played both, the 360 version looked like a puppet show with all the pop in.
Its good to see someone speaking out over these artistically bankrupt devs. If there is one person could lead this discussion, it would have to be Ueda, who is one of the most gifted devs working today. Seriously though, are gamers such sheep that they can go on playing the same regurgitated slop like GTA? The original concept was innovative, but rather than try and build from that they clung to a bunch of tired conventions and failed to innovate the series. I think all games are gravitating towards some form of RPG/FPS hybrid. There will come a day, when the COD of this genre comes along, rendering all other games inferior by comparison, and then devs are actually going to have to come up w/ an original idea.
While I do believe GTA4 hasn't delivered, I don't get you people. What is wrong with GTA? The games don't come out every year, are there so many GTA clones out there that the original has to reinvent itself over and over? I can't wait for the next GTA, and I don't want Rockstar to change the franchise fundamentaly, add stuff around it but keep it as it is. Aren't you playing anything else in between GTA games that you need Rockstar to make a completely new experience? That's what new IPs are for. I just hope Rockstar chooses to make the next GTA installment to be just on PS3/PC and not on 360. People are b!tching that GTA 4 hasn't delivered on content. How could it, it had to be gimped to 7 GB, just 3 GB more than San Andreas and that was a last gen title. The city in GTA4 has 10 times the details and texture resolution than San Andreas and people expect a miracle delivered on DVD. The PC version somehow grew to 2 full DVD9s, because it had 6 months incubation time? Well I don't think so.
There is a reason that its GTA4, and not GTA6, because even the devs themselves realize the series hasen't progressed enough to warrant an official sequel moniker. Honestly, I think SA progressed the series more that GTA4. My only point here is that, why bother reinventing the wheel when they already made it right the first time, when it was GTA3 on PS2. I would like to see them do more to spice the game up. The online addition was pretty innovative, but I would like to see them experiment a little more. Kinda like how inFAMOUS toyed w/ a Karma system. I thought even in inFAMOUS they could have fleshed this concept out a lot more. Of course DVD9 played a role in limiting GTA4's scope, but that's no excuse for the lack of truely original additions to the gameplay. I can live w/ the a smaller scale GTA if they can improve the core gameplay. Its quality, not quantity that is R* fault. Lets see if Agent can deliver where GTA has fallen short. I'm sure R* will keep the whole open world premise, but it sounds like they are trying to inject more elements into this game.